So... what you're saying is break-even 14/10 players are not good players? Shocker. Give me eight 14/10 players at the table, and I'll show you how to make a living with little variance.

Yup, yet another myth. I don't care about huds either way; ban them or don't - it doesn't matter to me. Creativity is about making a play that is considered atypical, yet can be substantiated as +EV. It has nothing to do with huds.

If your, "bet in position vs missed river cbet" is 82%, instead of going for straight value on the river, which would be the standard play, I can successfully induce a river bet from you and checkraise (or call). I can also break down the EV of the play accurately since all numbers are known.

That's a simple example of using a hud in a creative way, thinking critically that would make more money than those that couldn't do it. Most hud users are lazy (not unlike non hud users) and stick with the main 4 stats.

I had to switch to full-time live play after BF and my winrate is triple (in BB/100) live than it was online. No hud, no rakeback, no problem.

Too many here have to blame something for their results. You got guys yapping that it's rigged, huds or nits... there's always something preventing them from crushing the games, but that's fine. If this didn't exist, the games would be unbeatable.

I was just reviewing other post by JH1

JH1 you give up because im right and you are wrong.

Stop grinding for ffp man (JH1) those ring games are not trustworthy to say the least.

they are absolutely full of shady players and shady accounts.(like you)
players that have say datamined or even requested other peoples information about players in the games you want to play. Some people might look on that like cheating.



I dont understand the rb question at all
Im not sure it makes sense

This.

The honesty here made my day, thanks.

SN mitch evans?

Let's put it in really simple terms then. Let's say two players each make $5 per 100 hands if there was no rake.

Player A plays at a site where he gets raked $3 per 100 hands and there is no RB, ending up with $2 per 100 hands.

Player B plays at a site where he gets raked $5 per 100 hands, but gets 40% RB, ending up with $2 per 100 hands.

Both players are winning the same amount of money from other players - $5 per 100 hands. However, if you don't take RB into account, Player A leaves the table with $2 per 100 hands. Player B leaves the table breaking even. Is Player A better than Player B?

I'm putting my money on you having to make it simpler than that.


Player A makes $5 every hand he plays, and the poker site he plays at takes $1, leaving him with $4.

Player B makes $5 every hand he plays, and the poker site he plays at takes all $5, leaving him with $0. But later, the poker site gives him $4 back, so he has $4 again.

Which is the better player?

you guys are so off the point here..they are same
player b is paying more rake what is your point?

This example has no relation to what is going on at pstars.

I thought your complete lack of common sense was amusing for a while, but where the **** do you get off stating that I am a shady cheater with a shady account?

jesus christ I could run around telling people that you're a pedophile but I have no evidence of that either and it would generally be considered slander.

gtfo

For anyone else that needs the convenience.

lol @ this thread now. wtf?

The point is that in previous posts you've called player A a good player, and player B a rakeback whore, and now you're saying they're the same.

I'm pretty sure you won't understand that that's what just happened, but everyone else will, and that's good enough.

all i said was looking to buy other peoples information on games and players in them was kind of shady and others might agree with me. datamining is frowned upon as far as i know. the (like you) is in the wrong place i am sorry for that it was supposed to go after the requesting data part. unless you want to deny you took part in such a thing...

Your exactly the kind of player the new rules will destroy and i can see why you want to take that out on me. Remember i think they need a few more to slow you down banning HDM for starters would be wonderful

Im not understanding this RB question what are you people trying to get at?

a) I don't datamine. I don't buy HHs. I detest people that do and if you knew a damn thing about me you'd know I've been railing against Stars not doing enough to stop PTR type sites for a long time. You can **** right off with that accusation.
b) I do just fine before FPPs.

@Mods: Respectfully requesting a ban.

LMAO, this is so epic, they couldn't make it any simpler, still to hard for you lol

Sebastes, sorry I gotta say this; but plz stop making a fool of yourself. You have absolutely no clue. Calling people 'rakeback whores', getting rid of the entire VIP program?

Do you have any idea of what an average player in paying in rake? Let me give you an example: at plo100 you (on average: read dealt) pay 13 bb/100 hands. Which is a 6.5PTRBB/100 winrate; massive to say the least.

This means if you are b/e (before rb) you are still a solid winner. Shouldn't you just say get rid of the rake instead; or at least lower it in a way; that you might me able to beat the games?!

Thing is; the fancy VIP program causes you to play exclusively on one site, unless you are a recreational player; then you hardly get rb at all. So pokersites charge everyone, but only give a larger proportion back to loyal/pro players. Wc rake method is not gonna help you, just ship some $$ from the loyal/pro players directly to the PS treasury chest